| Literature DB >> 26904746 |
Josephat Qaday1, Margaretha Sariko2, Adam Mwakyoma3, Emmanuel Kifaro4, Dominick Mosha5, Richard Tarimo2, Balthazar Nyombi2, Elichilia Shao6.
Abstract
Background. Microbial transmission from patient to patient has been linked to transient colonization of health care workers attires. Contamination of health care workers' clothing including white coats may play a big role in transmission of microbes. Study Objective. This study was conducted to determine the type of bacterial contamination on the white coats of medical doctors and students and associated factors. Methods. A cross-sectional study with purposive sampling of the bacterial contamination of white coats was undertaken. Demographic variables and white coats usage details were captured: when the coat was last washed, frequency of washing, washing agents used, and storage of the white coats. Swabs were collected from the mouth of left and right lower pockets, sleeves, and lapels of white coat in sterile techniques. Results. Out of 180 participants involved in the current study, 65.6% were males. Most of the coats were contaminated by staphylococci species and other bacteria such as Gram negative rods. Conclusion and Recommendations. White coats are potential source of cross infection which harbour bacterial agents and may play a big role in the transmission of nosocomial infection in health care settings. Effort should be made to discourage usage of white coats outside clinical areas.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26904746 PMCID: PMC4745394 DOI: 10.1155/2015/507890
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Bacteriol ISSN: 2314-596X
Figure 2Techniques for swabbing white coats.
Social demographic characteristics of participants (N = 180).
| Variable |
|
|---|---|
| Sex | |
| Male | 118 (65.6) |
| Female | 62 (34.4) |
| Staff position | |
| Medical doctors | 60 (33.33) |
| Medical students | 120 (66.67) |
| Department | |
| Surgical | 80 (44.44) |
| Nonsurgical | 100 (55.56) |
| Duty station | |
| Inpatients | 150 (83.33) |
| Outpatients | 30 (16.67) |
| White coat storage after working hours | |
| Hospital | 28 (15.56) |
| Home/hostel | 152 (84.44) |
| Wearing clinical coats outside clinical area | |
| Yes | 8 (4.44) |
| No | 172 (95.56) |
Organism isolated from white coats (N = 132).
| S. number | Organism(s) | Numbers of isolates | Percentage of isolates |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
| 120 | 90.91% |
| 2 |
| 9 | 6.82% |
| 3 |
| 3 | 2.27% |
| Total | 132 | 100% |
Figure 1Days since last wash of clinical white coat (N = 180).
Risk factors associated with the detection of pathogens in clinical coats among study participants at KCMC, Moshi, Tanzania, in 2014.
| Variables | Pathogens detected |
Crude OR |
|
Adjusted OR |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | |||||
|
|
| |||||
| Gender | ||||||
| Female | 44 (31.4) | 18 (45.0) | ||||
| Male | 96 (68.6) | 22 (55.0) | 1.8 (0.9–3.7) | 0.114 | 1.4 (0.1–3.1) | 0.354 |
| Position (level) | ||||||
| Medical student | 94 (67.1) | 26 (65.0) | ||||
| Medical doctor | 46 (32.9) | 14 (35.0) | 0.9 (0.4–1.9) | 0.800 | 1.3 (0.6–2.8) | 0.576 |
| Area of residence | ||||||
| Off-campus | 114 (81.4) | 30 (75.0) | ||||
| In-campus | 26 (18.6) | 10 (25.0) | 0.7 (0.3–1.6) | 0.372 | 1.1 (0.4–2.7) | 0.903 |
| Working specialty | ||||||
| Surgical | 74 (52.9) | 6 (15.0) | ||||
| Nonsurgical | 66 (47.1) | 34 (85.0) | 0.2 (0.1–0.4) | <0.001 | 0.2 (0.1–0.5) | <0.001 |
| Duty station | ||||||
| Inpatients | 112 (80.0) | 38 (95.0) | ||||
| Outpatient | 28 (20.0) | 2 (5.0) | 4.8 (1.1–20.9) | 0.039 | 3.2 (0.7–14.9) | 0.132 |
| Days of worn coat since last washing | ||||||
| <3 days | 94 (67.2) | 26 (65.0) | ||||
| 3–7 days | 36 (25.7) | 14 (35.0) | 0.7 (0.3–1.5) | 0.376 | 0.6 (0.2–1.3) | 0.205 |
| >7 days | 10 (7.1) | 0 (0.0) | — | — | — | — |
| Wearing a white coat outside clinical areas | ||||||
| Yes | 6 (4.3) | 2 (5.0) | ||||
| No | 134 (95.7) | 38 (95.0) | 1.2 (0.2–6.1) | 0.847 | 1.3 (0.2–7.3) | 0.802 |
| Location for coat storage | ||||||
| Hospital area | 22 (15.7) | 6 (15.0) | ||||
| Home/hostel | 118 (84.3) | 34 (85.0) | 0.9 (0.4–2.5) | 0.912 | 0.6 (0.2–1.8) | 0.412 |
RR = relative risk; CI = confidence interval.
Estimated from the logistic regression model with Wald type P value.
Adjusted for gender, working specialty, and duty station.